Psychic card won't fix your problem in those two games. Seeing as you're running at max resolution, I'd say stick with your Quad SLI. Like prozac said, it'll be a while till there are more DX10 games to make use of the DX10 that the 8800s have.
I have a 590 system board and x6800 and HAD two 7950GX2's in quad SLI using the Dell 30" LCD and I never got very good performance at max res (2560x1600) in any game.
I have since bought two 8800 GTX's (drivers will not SLI for me yet) but one card is extremely better than the QSLI.
In default settings, NWN2 all game settings maxed, driver settings at default just rotating the camera around was very slow with the QSLI.
With the single 8800 GTX, same game settings, drivers at default it is more than twice as fast and lags only a bit with 8 party members and at least that many mobs.
IMHO QSLI is crap. As a single card on a 1600x1200 LCD the 7950GX2 is very good but higher it starts to slow down.
do the step up with the 1 card and use the other card for the other build or sell it.if your still not happy with performance then save for another card and sli later.from what i see you should be happy with the 1 8800 gtx card
If you got that much cash to blow on a system, why not get the best?
Aside from DX10 support you also get the "EVGA service gnomes" dispatched to your place to replace the card in case of a failure. Not.
The 8800GTX will rock your HD resolution monitor. You might need a second card to max out and run v-sync(if wanted) at your res. Qsli had it's run, but the 8800's dominate for the time being. I personaly would take advantage of the step-up program while you have that option.
There have been some shakey driver issues since launch with the 8800's in sli. I have only been able to use the ones on the driver CD. EVGA did a mainboard BIOS update on the 680i's recently that fixed some other sound issues with sli. I havn't seen very many problems with just 1 card. The drivers will continue to mature.
True, but the problem with quad sli is that you are splitting a x16 bandwidth among two graphics cards, and not two cards on two slots, so what you get is four cards running on x8 bandwdith, causing quad sli to be weaker than a single gtx
Once again, PCIe bandwidth has NOTHING to do with the poor performance of Quad SLI. The lack of 4 way AFR in Direct X9 and poor software support/implementation are the things causing the poor performance for Quad SLI.
Why are the conroes faster than pentium Ds? Better bandwidth due to better architecture.
The Notebook Core 2 Duos (Merom) use a 667MHz FSB and have less bandwidth than the Pentium Ds, and perform within a couple of percent of the speed of the Conroe 1066MHz FSB C2Ds. Bandwidth has nothing to do with the C2D > Netburst issue, IPC does.
Why did the athlons kill the netburst cpus? Better bandwidth due to hyper transport.
Hypertransport itself has LESS bandwidth than FSB @ 800MHz. The A64s won out due to far better IPC and lower power usage.
Gee I wonder, would running a graphics card at 8x bandwidth be slower than running it at 16x bandwidth?
Yup, by ~3%.
Either way, the gx2 is basically two 7900gts, which is another reason why dual 7900gtxs and the 8800 series are faster, the gx2 has a weaker processor
It has the same G71 processor as the 7900GTX, only with slower stock clocks. They are handpicked low TDP ones that would otherwise have become mobile chips due to the cooling limitations of the 7950GX2. These should clock just as well as the 7900GTX when properly volted and cooled.
The 8800GTX is superior to 7950GX2 Quad SLI imho, but not because it runs on PCIe x16 rather than the 2*PCIe x16 that 7950GX2 Quad SLi usually runs on.